These reported ages are very suspect. There is no way they can accurately determine the age of trees by an increment core. Many times a tree may put on two or three increments in one year caused by drastic weather changes. A small portion of the trunk will put on extra “ half” years, only half way around the trunk because a stress exerted on the tree. Without seeing the full disc at multiple heights can a reasonable age be determined. A conservatory would be more incline to give a high age to claim a need to preserve the area.
I think you’re right and frankly my dear....
The University of Arizona’s Laboratory of Tree Ring Research explains:
Ring-counting does not ensure the accurate dating of each individual ring. Numerous studies illustrate how ring-counting leads to incorrect conclusions drawn from inaccurate dating. Dendrochronologists demand the assignment of a single calendar year to a single ring. Various techniques are used to crossdate wood samples to assure accurate dating.
Or you can saw it off as happened with the unfortunate bristlecone pine?
I agree. After Hurricane Florence trees in my yard that were stripped of all leaves underwent a second spring in the same year.
My sister, a botanist, discovered the largest known specimen of the Pond Cypress (Taxodium ascendens) in a North Carolina swamp. Unfortunately it is practically inaccessible except in the dead of a dry winter. A core has yet to be taken as there wasn’t a large enough device to do it on the east coast. A request to borrow a large one from out west has been made but those things move slowly.